egs£a:^3cc«i:«;a£g:£jcag;£sgjgsy( 



% LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. % 



Chap. ....E,.i3.?.„.. 



ID 



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, i 



\ 



^ u..^ V. , 



3eniam\c\ r^3^^^\^n Jie.L.<iSTi 

l\ 



Wtm^}am t 



A Moti-on for tJie Siay vf Judg'inmt . 



But stay, I'll react it oVter bricB 
again. li UtNuY, vi. 

A'nong th'e Roniajns QuihtuS 
Fatdiis fbt thisqualitie is soue- 
i-aignely extolled anionge his- 
toriens ; and for that cavise he 
is often times called of them 



■XEW YORK: 









TfcTerrat^ann. 



rpHE New-England Historical and Ge- 
X nealogical Register for January is 
at hand, laden with valuable material, 
several leaves of w'hich remained uncut 
until recently; otherwise one of tlie con- 
tributions would have been noticed ere 
this, since it demands attention. The 
article in question relates chiefly to Mr. 
Murphy's recent publication on the voy- 
age of Yerrazzano, a Navigator in the 
service of Francis I., King of France, 
who, in 1524, sailed along the Atlantic 
coast, and described New^ England. Mr, 
Murphy has come forward to demon- 
strate that the voya-ge never took place, 
and that the Letter attributed to Ver- 
razzano is a fabrication. The writer 
wi the Rfif^iiHeo" enilorses Mr, Murphy, 



4 

and tells ns that we must draw a black 
line over all that has been written on the 
subject in our histories. But not so' 
fast. 

Of course, it is the I'ight, hny the duty^ 
of every historical student to criticise the 
annals of the pnst and eliminate the false' 
from the true. There is too little of thi.«f' 
work done in these days. But the critic 
himself is amenable to criticisin, ahd Mr^ 
Murphy's work is open to serious objec- 
tions. He, indeed, makes out a plausi-- 
ble theory, and his ingeiiious argutnents' 
might deceive even the elect. Still,- 
while the spirit of the writet is adfnifable,- 
and the aim fair, liis ivork is quite over- 
shadowed by the influence of tlie j^rofes-- 
sional habit; and we diseoTer, not only 
the historian in search of truth, but the* 
attorney warmly reaching out to grasiy 
the verdict. Hence the work is charac- 
terized by organic weakness, disguise(?- 
under an- appearance of strength.- 



o 

We cHiniot (leal here in detail with Mr. 
jMurphy's work, as it woukl require the 
h^e-Avay of a Quarterly Review; but we 
may, nevertheless, point out several 
faults. 

As a general observation, it might 
be noted that the work is based chiefly 
upon two assumptions, namely, that the 
Letter of Yerrazzano, printed in 1556, 
giving an account of the voyage, was 
draw-n from a document known as the 
" Carli Letter," and that the Letter of 
Yerrazzano was unknown in the lifetime 
of Francis I. We repeat, deliberately, 
that these are assumptions. And upon 
this foundation the whole superstructure 
of doubt has been reared. Now of the 
probable value of these assumptions the 
reader may better judge, after the state- 
ment of a fact or two, indicating the 
faulty character of Mr. Murphy's infor- 
mation respecting some topics that should 
be well understood. We refer to what 
he says about the information contained 



6 
in Verrazzano's Letter, which, he claims, 
fails to mention well known things, and 
that, therefore, he could never liave made 
the voyage or visited the New England 
coast. Amongst other omissions by Ver- 
razzano, is that of the subject of wam- 
pum; also of tobacco and Indian names. 
The writer in the Reyister thinks, witli 
Mr. Murphy, that these omissions are 
remarkable, and therefore refuses to 
believe that VeiTazzano described New 
England from actual knowledge. But, 
before adopting this conclusion, we 
should inquire, not only what other ex- 
l^lorers have said, but what they have not 
said. Various early writers do not men- 
tion either wampum, tobacco, or any 
Indian words. But we are finally told, 
that the " most remarkable omission 
of all" is that of the hark canoe, which 
Yerrazzano, if he had mfede the voyage, 
must have seen covering the waters. 
Yerrazzano does not mention the bark 
canoe, but does say that the natives 



7 
made their canoes from the trunks of 
trees, which they burned out, and 
shaped into boats. And in this respect 
Verrazzano i^.perfedli/ correct. Lescar- 
bot Avhen <m the New England coast 
ill 1607, investigated the whole sub- 
ject, and we know both from him and 
Champlain, that, while bark canoes were 
made in Massachusetts and Maine, 
the prevaiUug tijpe was that of the log 
canoe. In 1524, it is probable that the 
birch canoe was not known at all, as it 
Avas difficult to make before the introduc- 
tion of iron tools by Europeans, and was 
confined to northern parts, where the 
trees were generally small and scarce, 
which rendered canoes of bark and skin 
necessary, no matter what might be the 
cost. Farther south, in Maine and Mas- 
sachusetts, Avhere the timber was larger, 
fire would build tf!f the canoe, and this > 
easy but slow style of naval construction 
prevailed, until the white man came with 
sharp knives and hatchets. Then the 



8 
tedious process of buiuiiig gradually went 
out of use, since, with sharp tools, a canoe 
could be made from bark in a day. 

On this point, however, we have defi- 
nite statements. Lescarbot, who treats 
at large of the canoe in his work on 
"Nfew France," tells us that the north- 
ern and Canadian fashion is to build with 
bark; but that the peoj^le living between 
Nova Scotia and Florida have •' another 
fashion;" and he minutely describes the 
manner in which they burned out and 
shaped their canoes, as they did in the 
day of Verrazzano. Moreover, Cham- 
plain tells us himself that he sate the log 
canoes near Cape Ann, though he also 
mentions the bark canoe, which was then 
coming into vogue, the Indians being 
encouraged by the tools and the example 
of the white man; wdio also taught him to 
propel his canoe by means of sails, of 
which Jossleyn, for instance, gives an 
example. 

Champlain not only saw the log canoe, 



9 
but, at 8{ico, Le.scarbot also notes tlicni. 
SpeakiDg- of the French at that phice he 
says, "presently the Sea was seene all 
couerecl oner with their Eoatts, ladtn 
with nimble and Insly men holding them- 
selves vp straight in them: which wee 
cannot doe without danger, those Boates 
being nothing else hut frees ho/lowed out.'" 
(Purchas, Vol. 4, p. 1633.) 

We give this simply as one illustration 
of the w^oithlessness of the charges 
brought by Mr. Muri^hy against the Let- 
ter of Verrazzano. The " most remark- 
able omission of all," or the failure to 
speak of the hark canoe, is one of the 
proofs of its authentic.it I/. And if the 
charges in connection with well known 
matters are of this character, what ground 
is there for confidence in connections 
where knowledge is not so easily acquir- 
ed? Some reply to this query will be 
given at another time. It suffices to say 
for the present, that this elaborate Avork 
by Mr. Murphy appears to us as a grand 



10 

mistake. It does not even give correct 
teaching respecting the boundaries of 
New France, or Norombega; the narrative 
of Jean AUfonsce being mistranslated, 
latitude fort if -five being given for the 
" Cape of Norombega," which AUfonsce 
says is in fort i/ -one. The map drmvn to 
embody the blunder, with all the conclu- 
sions built upon it, therefore falls to the 
ground; like the charges brought against 
Verrazzano, in connection with the har- 
borage, overlooking the fact that many 
others met with similar experiences. All 
this may appear ungracious, but we 
speak in the interest of the truth. 

Assuming that the Carli version was 
the source of Ramusio's, Mr. Murphy 
attacks the author's veracity, because he 
says that, in a part of America the color 
of the natives was black and " not much 
different " from that of Ethiopians, 
though it is clear that it was different. 
If, however, we were to reject every old 
narrative on account of i^alpable exagge- 



11 

rations, we slioulcl have little material 
left. It would then fare hard with Car- 
tier who, in his voyage of 1534, puts 
tropical productions in Canada, and with 
Popliam, who (1607) made nutmegs grow 
in New England, and with Gosnold 
(1602) whose scribe makes certain men 
in Vineyard Sound black and ihin beard- 
ed, and with AVeymouth (1605) who 
makes the women of Maine black. Oth- 
erwise, .conceding for the time the as- 
sumption that the Carli version is the 
original, Mr. Murphy's objection is not 
criticism. One might as well tell us that 
the proprietor of Merry Mount was never 
in New England, because he says that 
tliiy have no coughs and colds there. 
Referring, however, the Ramusio and 
Carli versions, to an earlier version, as 
Ave have a perfect right to do, (though 
Avilling even that the matter should be 
decided by the Carli version alone, as the 
objections, if not corruptions, may be 
simply common exaggerations, like some 



12 
of those pointed out,) Ave shall then the 
more readily understand the dilierences 
in the two texts; since, for instance, 
Hakhiyt, when translatiug Allfonsce, 
makes him say that figs grow in Canada, 
while a second translation tells us that 
Canada extends to the land of Figuier. 
Without an original version to refer to, 
we might say that the latter was "worked 
over" from the former to conceal the 
author's ignorance; or that Mr. Murphy's 
version of Allfonsce, where he says that 
the natives of Norombega are ' ' large 
and handsome," is worked over from the 
coiTui^t edition of Allfonsce, of 1559, 
which declares that these people are 
small and hlackisli. Fortunately, how- 
ever, we have the original. But, in con- 
nection with the Carli version itself, we 
have an illustration of the manner in 
which language is perverted. For in- 
stance, that disinterested scholar, the late 
Dr. Coggswell, translates one passage 
from the Carli version as follows: "We 



13 

have ofteii seen the grapes which tlie^' 
i)rodiice very sweet and pleasant, and not 
unlike onr own 5" but Mr. Murphy's ver- 
si(jn itisists upoii the folloAving: "Be- 
cause ffffitiiit/ the fruit mcfuy fimea, we per- 
ceived it was sweet and pleasant, not 
different from ours." Thus wide are the 
departures already tnade Ivithin a feV 
years from ■ the version of C'arli^ and 
they indicate faintly the nature of the 
ticissitudes which have overtaken the 
(original Letter of VerrazzaiiO; It is 
therefore ib be regretted, so far afe pres- 
ent consequences inay be concet-ned, that 
the laligttage of the Florentine has been 
treated in wliai sfeemfs to uS such an un- 
fortunate Way; 

We close this brief notice by referring 
to the significant fact that Mr.- Murphy 
^ive^ oHe pie'ce 6f teaching in his book,- 
(p. 145) ithich/ if triie, would hate ol^vi- 
ated the necessity of printing ah expen- 
sive and elegant octavo volume. The' 
leaching is this,- tlvat at the time Verraz- 



u 

^zaiio, aecol-ding to his Letter, AVas explol'- 
ing America, he was actually engaged as 
a Corsair, capturing a ship on her way 
home from the Indies. But Mr. Mur- 
phy does not give us the date of cap- 
ture, which he would have done, if 
there had lofeeh aliy io give. The proof 
of this should have been upon the 
forefront of his book; though sucli proof 
would have been all the book needed. 
As it is, the teaching finds its own jDlace 
in an obscure corliei', only to spring 
upon the reader at the proper time, when 
warmed with supposit^oiis doubt. There 
is nothing in it. 

We believe, therefore, that when thor- 
oughly discussed, the Letter of Verrraz= 
zano, like the Voyage of the Zeni, Avill 
rise above all doubt, and that the names 
of Eamusio and Verrazzano, the Histo- 
rian and the Navigator, will alike stand 
together in the annals of America, to the 
end of time\ 



(Sbb^nBct* 



since the foregoing was put in type^ 
a copy of the '' E^vue Criiique'' has 
come to handj containing copies of two 
documents Ju&t discovered in the archives 
of Rouen, which show that Yerrazzano 
had a brother named Jerome. He was 
the author of the Map that indicates 
the voyagCi This brother has been treat- 
fed as a myth by some, in oi*der to discred- 
it both voyage and map; But the dis- 
covery shows that, May 11th, 1526, this 
Jerome was livings and that " Jerasme 
de Varasenne" was the bi-othei- alid heii' 
[frere d heritier) of the "Noble homme 
Jehan de Varasenne.'^ 

To ilhiStrate the eaSe with which a 
disputant with a theory adopts whatevei* 
appears to be in his faVor^ it may be 



4 V i.. 



'vrvv.AA-A.^ v\>_^^^ 



ill 

pointed out that the estimable author of 
the work under notice teaches tliat Mar- 
tin Pring, in 1(503, obtained a bark canoe 
at Martha's Vineyai-di lu this he follows 
the stoi'y rtet afloat in 11^97 l\v Belknap; 
In 1608 Martin Pring did not go around 
br soutii 6l Cape Odd; and therefore did 
not obtain any bark canoe or build any 
•* barricado " at Martha's Vinevard; 



p^^ 



.V' 



(V- 




,«-i«!«fe<*. 



